Comparison between political systems offered by Moses,Pericles, Lao Tzu, and Plato. Among the political systems provided by Moses from ‘Exodus’, Pericles from Thucydides’s ‘History of the Peloponnesian War’, Lao Tzu in ‘Tao Te Ching’ and Socrates in Plato’s ‘Republic’, Plato’s envision of a ideal society is the most appealing. Despite the fact that we find faults with some of his opinion like eugenics and an impossibly strict social class structure(which are not to be taken literally anyways), the ‘republic’ reflects deeply on the crimes of the previous or existing political systems, on democracy(its faults we can find in Thucydides’s writing), aristocracy, and attempts to resolve their problems. Its great value also lie in its debate around virtue, justice, moral excellence, the ideal form, and how to deal with the public and intelligence. The emphasis that Plato makes on the internal reconciliation of an individual between reason, moral and appetites goes deeper than merely a question of how states can govern well, and by putting the state and the individual’s soul in parallel, Plato recognizes that transforming the mind is the root to forming an ideal society. – comparison of plato’s republic against two of the other three works. -the books used are (and need to be cited): “Exodus” in really any version of the bible; ISBN-13: 978-0140440393; ISBN-13: 978-0140455113; ISBN-13: 978-0061142666; -the notes of these books are in the files attached. The purpose of this term paper is to provide an opportunity to explore your own ideas on the contemporary relevance of topics discussed in the course. This is not intended to be a research paper – that is, a summary of what other authors have said. Rather, although research may be used, the paper is supposed to be a defense of your stand on the issue. Length​​: 5 pages minimum. There is no maximum length, but it is probably unnecessary to go beyond ten pages. Please type your paper, double space, and use reasonable type and margins. Citations:​​ There is no requirement on the amount of research or number of citations (footnotes etc.). However, you should do everything possible to avoid even the hint of plagiarism. If a fact is generally well known (e.g. “Trump is President”) no citation is needed. However, if you are in any way using someone else’s work (paraphrase, summary, quote etc.) then cite it. When in doubt cite. In citing something use MLA style (Author’s Name Page#). If it’s something like ​The Bible, ​ then quote chapter and verse and no ‘works cited’ is needed. If your citation is from something generally less well known and/or the author has lots of books the ‘Works Cited’ should be something like: Nabokov, Vladimir. ​Lolita ​ . New York: Putnam, 1955. For other types of citations see the MLA style sheet. If you don’t have one, they are all over the internet. If your source is strange (e.g. telepathic communication with the mummy of King Tut), don’t use it. If you can’t find any way to cite a source, then ask or give as much information as you can. Again, this is NOT a research paper so the idea is NOT to collect lots of sources. The idea with citations for this exercise is to avoid anything that even remotely looks like plagiarism. Here again the idea is not to obsess over plagiarism, just make an honest effort to avoid it. Due Date​​: The paper is due 12/12. You have the option of doing a draft which is due 11/28 AT THE LATEST. but will be gratefully accepted at any time prior. ANY PAPER HANDED IN AFTER 11/28 WILL BE GRADED AS A FINAL DRAFT. If you do a draft I will hand it back to you with a provisional grade that is NOT recorded. You may revise the paper or keep the draft grade. If you want to keep the draft grade you must hand the paper back to me by the regular due date. Extensions​​: Extensions are possible on request. HOWEVER, you must request an extension and it is your responsibility to hand in the paper on the agreed date. ​N.B​​.: it is your responsibility to make sure all your work is completed. If something is missing and I can’t contact you there is a risk that you will get an F for the class. Topic​​: Every political thinker we have discussed: Moses, Pericles, Lao Tzu, Socrates, Plato, and Aristotle has offered us a political system that claims to provide people with the good life (virtue, moral excellence, etc.). Which one in your opinion is the most correct? You can back up your conclusion using any sources and methods you deem fit. Your grade is based on the quality of your argument. Procedure​​: Briefly discuss all the available options. There are more thinkers than the above but for this exercise stick to the four mentioned above. For the purposes of this exercise you can’t take a middle, both, neither, or any sort of ‘gray (regardless of the # of shades) area’ position. Argue for one thinker as the best. There is no right or wrong – again, your grade is based on the quality of your argument.

    Comparing Plato’s Regeneral and Gregarious Systems Offered by Moses, Pericles, and Lao Tzu

    In the Republic, Plato explores the Socratic restriction of uprightness and what the general should do to subdue the challenges that obtain?} establish in their direct environment. As the peculiars fixeds quenched to manifest the actions of the masterful assort and their restraintce to truth rule to govern the quenchedcomes of events, Plato asserts that a similarity should be choice of behindcited methods. In this circumstance, the Socratic perspective of uprightness is ruled by the restraintce of substances to comprise undeniable standards that trundle-wallow abquenched wellsubstance and advice. From this attention, there is a demand restraint the peculiars to consort with aspects of intercourse that courtesy their values and help them to be emend citizens in their direct environment. Plato envisions a right intercourse where fellow-creatures are guided by manners, and the gregarious assort is choice of countenanceing its promises to the citizenry in its gift regularity. Therefore, the existent age should aspire the concepts of Plato in their governance and interaction with other fellow-creatures in their verbiage.

    Moses in the Exodus

    Biblical scholars enjoy verified the sagacity of events that took establish during and behind the threadage of Moses. Manifold enjoy indicated the symbolism that is unshaken to the quenchedcome of activities that obtain?} establish directly behind the threadage of Moses. In the Holy Bible, the standpoint is directed towards Moses who opposing substance a stammerer was appointed by God to bring the Israelites to the promised settle. From this event, the divine magnitude portrays bringership as an disposition that is ordained by God to his selected fellow-creatures whom he believes can bring the fellow-creatures and utensil his conciliate (Boyer 130). In such a residence, the general is expected to submit their directs and rejoin to instructions that are quenchedlined by those in rule. Even as the intercourse establishes a fixed of structural challenges that concern the perspectives of substances towards undeniable things in intercourse, Moses in the Exodus attends a over speaking operation that compels substances to comprise undeniable beliefs during their interactions with others.

    Notably, the Mosaic Method required the Hebrews to render with the expectations of God as they undertook their activities in their direct environment. In this conceive, there is a demand restraint the masses to submit the standards of the league that was signed on Mount Sinai during their interactions with other fellow-creatures. Interestingly, the uniqueness of the Mosaic Method was harmonious to the Suzerian Treaty that occurred among a King and Nobles. However, the Mosaic Method demonstrated the unison among the Hebrews and God where the restraintmer would render with the rules quenchedlined by the latter during their grade towards things in the medieval universe. During this term, it was vile restraint deities to direct the manner of substances who struggled with their abilities to countenance the expectations of the gods. In this circumstance, the Hebrews were expected to render with the hopes of God to philanthropy and escape any illustration that would concern their interaction with their creator in an seek to drift His conciliate.

    Compared to Plato’s definition of uprightness and the method, Moses’ conclusion differs speakingly becatruth of its grade that binds fellow-creatures to the expectations of the earth. From this event, the Hebrews were expected to mark the methods of the earth and involve them in their direct environment during their interactions with other fellow-creatures. Unlike the Mosaic Method, the Socratic restriction of uprightness expects substances to imprison their judgments to the method of the settle that represents their interests and attends their demands (Baltes 27). In this circumstance, there is a demand restraint the peculiars to align their objectives with the expectations of the legitimate sciences to escape any illustrations that sform surrender them to harm’s restraintm. Suitableness Plato contrived to invent a design science restraint uprightness that has since been involved in the existent universe, it is compulsory restraint the fellow-creatures to comprise the values of candor and esteem its contact on the livelihoods of the fellow-creatures.

    Tao Te Ching by Lao Tzu

    In the Chinese romance, substances are expected to beenjoy in a undeniable restraintm that demonstrates the contact of restricted effects and philosophies on the intercoursestyles of the fellow-creatures. In this conceive, there is a demand restraint the general to relate a ample rank of beliefs during their interactions with other fellow-creatures restraint them to be accepted in their direct environment (Koptseva and Vladimir 119). Importantly, Lao Tzu plain restricted philosophies that guided the perspectives of substances towards intercourse. Mainly, the concepts and effects enabled the general to invent viable discerptions restraint their direct residences and subdue challenges that concerned their enterprise in the workplace. Unlike the existent universe where technology has made things easier, intercourse in the medieval universe was imprisond to restricted usages that poor the judgment regularity of the general to feature gradees during their definition of residences in their verbiage.

    Correlative thinking was defined by the restraintce of a peculiar to truth structure and other restraintms of imagery to regulatem an effect that can unfpreceding a importunate demand in their direct environment. Interestingly, Tzu silent the short-sightedness structure of the general and their judgment to investigation whole advice antecedently developing a viable discerption that could oration problems that interfered with their perspectives towards quenchedcomes of events in the similarity. It sought to grade the Chinese restraintm of intercourse to other fellow-creatures who had a poor definition of the amelioration suitableness reminding the fellow-creatures of the issues that should be escapeed to bring a prosperous intercourse. Unity of opposites and the vitality of transmute tackled the doggedness of the fellow-creatures when they are surrenderd to a challenging environment that pushes them quenched of their self-approval zone. Even as the preceding similarity demonstrated an definition of the expected restraintm of intercourse, the intercoursestyle conversant a mitigate transition into the existent age where the residence has been elated through the preamble of technology in fellow-creatures’s lives.

    Suitableness Plato’s design intercourse did referable meet the contact of technology on their usages, there was the classify that was cherished by the fixed of rules and instructions that promoted cohesion and helpd the fellow-creatures to coalesce restraint a vile end in intercourse. From this event, there is a demand to concede the contact of methods on the manner of substances and the restraintce of bringers to challenge their rules to govern the quenchedcomes of events in their direct environment (Demir 39). As quenchedlined in their magistracy, it is redundant restraint substances in positions of rule to i-elation the conciliate of fellow-creatures and utensil their advices becatruth the method is reputed to attend the interests of the citizenry. In thread with the expectations of manifold substances, democracy allows substances to usage operating address and countenance relating issues that concern their intercoursestyles. Hence, governments should deposit in establish measures that shield the rights and operatingdoms of the fellow-creatures.

    Greek Civilization by Pericles

    Pericles is celebrated restraint his stimulate to shape democracy in Athens and inaugurate a order of fruit projects that led to the recollection of the narrow town as the standpoint of Greece. Interestingly, the era he led Athens was informally believed and denoted as the “Age of Pericles” where the city shaped its undeveloped and inaugurated measures that could enjoy been truthd to emend the intercoursestyles of the fellow-creatures (Bartsc 237). From this attention, it is incontrovertible that the bringership styles that are adopted by multitudinous substances who possess positions of rule in contemporary intercourse rule the quenchedcomes of events in intercourse. Suitableness Plato narrowed on a design set-forth where substances could finish their objectives by adhering to the true methods, Pericles believed that fellow-creatures should be surrenderd to an enabling environment where they could manifest their undeveloped. Existent governments should aspire the concepts truthd by their predecessors in the medieval era to emend the livelihoods of substances in their magistracy.


    The existent age should aspire the concepts of Plato in their governance and interaction with other fellow-creatures in their verbiage. In this conceive, it is compulsory restraint governments to shape their objectives and with them with the interests of the fellow-creatures to finish their obligations and emend the residence of the peculiars. In manifold illustrations, scholars enjoy explored the incongruous gradees that can be truthd to shape the objectives, which trundle-wallow abquenched the figment of an enabling environment to shape their objectives in the workestablish and over.

    Works Cited

    Boyer, Stuart W. “Narrow Groups and Bringer Peculiaral Fruit.” Biblical Bringership Fruit. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham, 2019. 127-146.

    Baltes, Matthias. “Is the Effect of the Good in Plato’s Regeneral over Substance?” Studies in Plato and the Platonic romance. Routledge, 2017. 21-42.

    Demir, Abdullah. “The Relationship of Effect and Features in Plato: Episteme versus Doxa.” Entelekya Logico-Metaphysical Review 1.1-2 (2017): 37-46.

    Koptseva, Natalia P., and Vladimir I. Kirko. “Aspects of gregarious learning in the tractate Lao Tzu “Tao Te Ching”.” Mediterranean Journal of Social Sciences 6.5 (2015): 119.

    Bartsch, Shadi. “The Ancient Greeks in Existent China: History and Metamorphosis.” Receptions of Greek and Roman Antiquity in East Asia (2018): 237.